Canadian citizens abroad United States 1,062,640 Hong Kong 300,000 United KINGDOM 87,000 France 60,000 Lebanon 45,000 UAE 40,000 etc..... Ps.... More than 9% of all Canadian citizens live outside of Canada. That compares to 1.7% of Americans outside US Pps...believe it or not the USMNT is FIFA ranked #27 and the Canucks #73! Ppps...just think...in six Months, if Pulisic is ever able to walk again, where we'll be!
So who did you leave out for #4 and 5 on that list? Belgium? They got some good beer there, so I'm sure they are pretty high on the list.
Long read on why white collar crime prosecution is at its lowest. I particularly liked the bit about people hiding money from their second wives. 1226864129706618881 is not a valid tweet id
Here's an interesting point that is pretty obvious that I'm kicking myself for not thinking of it: It provides a convenient TL;DR snippet, IMO The criminal justice system has given up all pretense that the crimes of the wealthy are worth taking seriously. In January 2019, white-collar prosecutions fell to their lowest level since researchers started tracking them in 1998. Even within the dwindling number of prosecutions, most are cases against low-level con artists and small-fry financial schemes. Since 2015, criminal penalties levied by the Justice Department have fallen from $3.6 billion to roughly $110 million. Illicit profits seized by the Securities and Exchange Commission have reportedly dropped by more than half. In 2018, a year when nearly 19,000 people were sentenced in federal court for drug crimes alone, prosecutors convicted just 37 corporate criminals who worked at firms with more than 50 employees. With few exceptions, the only rich people America prosecutes anymore are those who victimize their fellow elites. Pharma frat boy Martin Shkreli, to pick just one example, wasn’t prosecuted for hiking the price of a drug used to treat HIV from $13.50 to $750 per pill. He went to prison for scamming investors in a hedge fund scheme years before. Meanwhile, in 2016, the CEO whose company experienced the deadliest mining disaster since 1970 served less than one year in prison and paid a fine of 1.4 percent of his salary and stock bonuses the previous year. Why? Because overseeing a company that ignores warnings and causes the deaths of workers, even 29 of them, is a misdemeanor. Construction magnate Bruce Karatz provides an infuriating case study of how the criminal justice system treats wealthy defendants. In 2010, Karatz was convicted of failing to disclose in a financial statement that he had secretly “backdated” his stock options (think Biff with the Sports Almanac in “Back to the Future II”) to boost his pay by more than $6 million. Prior to his sentencing hearing, his lawyer submitted letters of support from former mayor of Los Angeles Richard Riordan and billionaire philanthropist Eli Broad. Prosecutors recommended six-and-a-half-years in prison; the judge gave Karatz five years’ probation and eight months of house arrest in his Bel Air mansion. After two years, the judge terminated the remainder of the sentence. Karatz later received a civic award from The Malibu Times for volunteer work he did to make a good impression for his sentencing hearing. EDIT: And what dapip says.
Oh, the bolded is massively true. In various situations. I grew up around a few elites and didn't even realize it. They'll bail you out if you screw up and it doesn't affect them, but lord help you if it does.
Yes, it’s a tweet. Yes, it’s about the current election. Nonetheless, I think this is the best thread for it: 1229991795146330112 is not a valid tweet id Basically, we’re fvcked as a Democracy, thanks to wealth concentration and C.U.N.T.
I doubt Bloomberg has 64 billion in cash. But he probably has some very liquid investments that he is cashing out to spend all that money. It is his money, made it by creating a pretty good product, his Bloomberg terminals as far as I know basically are the Microsoft office of Trading desks. For what I remember, even if citizens united was still the law of the land, Bloomberg could still do what he is doing, there was always a billionaire "loophole" in the law. According to this vox article it was a 1976 case that opened the door for Bloomberg. https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/20...-money-politics-dark-money-vouchers-primaries
If Bloomberg, Steyer or the current crop of billionaires (like 200 of them in the US) had been in business in pre-Reagan, they would not have so much money to spend. If the SCOTUS had not authorized unlimited anonymous campaign contributions, we would not have Russia buying the GOP via the NRA and Facebook would not be pullulating with fake news and hate speech. Yeah, he has a nice product, but that doesn't mean that he was paid more money that he knows what to do with, and that is helping kill our democracy.
They would still have a lot, since they made their money with Capital gains. https://www.fool.com/retirement/2017/02/11/a-95-year-history-of-maximum-capital-gains-tax-rat.aspx See my second part, Citizens United has nothing to do with Bloomberg spending his own money as he wants.
These people are scared. Sooner or later the time will come. 1230920932925071362 is not a valid tweet id
GMAFB!!!!! https://www.ft.com/content/b8961936-51a6-11ea-8841-482eed0038b1 Look, I am a Democrat, but they said those things in a shrill way to raise the stakes on the outcome,” Blankfein says. “I don’t think it’s unreasonable or cynical for a legislator to have said that what Trump did was wrong, and showed bad character, but it was not at a level where we’re going to overturn an election nine months before the next one.” But Trump is already taking revenge on those who testified against him, I protest. “Bill Clinton, who I supported, perjured himself,” Blankfein replies. “That’s a literal crime. And he was acquitted.” Just to be clear, I press, you do not share the Democratic party’s fears about Trump’s autocratic leanings? “Look, it’s crazy not to acknowledge the economy has expanded under Trump,” Blankfein says. “Some of this is related to tax reform. The cheapest stimulus is getting rid of dopey regulations [including on Wall Street]. All I’m saying is that Democrats would have a far stronger case if they conceded what was good.” Though Blankfein remains as cheerful as when we sat down, I can feel the thermometer rising a little. Who would you pick if it boiled down to Trump or Sanders, I ask. For the first time in our exchange, he pauses. “I think I might find it harder to vote for Bernie than for Trump,” he says. “There’s a long time between now and then. The Democrats would be working very hard to find someone who is as divisive as Trump. But with Bernie they would have succeeded.” But you would say that, I reply, because you are a billionaire. Sanders is proposing a wealth tax on people like you. “I don’t like that at all,” says Blankfein. “I don’t like assassination by categorisation. I think it’s un-American. I find that destructive and intemperate. I find that just as subversive of the American character as someone like Trump who denigrates groups of people who he has never met. At least Trump cares about the economy.”
"I don't behave that way" ... says the guy who portrays Bernie Sanders as a threat to the country, solely because Sanders might raise his taxes. Yes you do behave that, Lloyd. Yes you do.
Bump this thread. Not exactly about income disparity, but on how most [some/all?] charities are basically the same as corporate America: Brian A. Gallagher, CEO of United Way Worldwide, has announced his resignation amid claims that the charity mishandled internal allegations of sexual harassment and discrimination. The organization is the world’s largest privately funded nonprofit.https://t.co/j9URINoS9a— The Associated Press (@AP) February 10, 2021